DARAAN ~
q04-10331-107164 | 2025 RELEASE UNDER THE PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY ASSASSINATION RECORDS ACT OF wa

.

re ot Secret

5 March 1997

Memorandum For: Fred Wickham, DO Focal Point for JFK

Linda Cipriani, OGC Focal Point for JFK

From: - Barry Harrelson GH

JFK Project Officer

Subject: - (U) CIA Employees Names in JFK Records

(AIOU) In meetings on March 4, 1997, I raised with
David Marwell and Jeremy Gunn my concerns with the large
number of employee names scheduled for review in May 1997
and the potential harm to the Agency if most of these names
are released. I found both receptive to our concerns and
willing to re-open the issue of the release of CIA employees
true names with the Board. Marwell cautioned, however, that
they could not predict the Board's response and that we
should move expeditiously to provide our “evidence” to the
Board. ;

(w If you agree with my assessment of the situation (see
below), I recommend we move quickly to engage upper
management and prepare the necessary material. Please
provide your response as soon as possible. .

Background

(AIOU) In March 1996, the ARRB agreed to protect the
names of all Agency staff employees that appear in JFK
documents until May 1997. The agreement reflected the
Board's recognition of the need to facilitate the document
review, and that it would take time for the Agency to
collect evidence to defend individual. names.

(AIOU) Jeremy Gunn's memo summarizing the Board's
approach to the release of CIA employee names describes a
name-by-~name approach and sets categories and specific
requirements for the release or protection of an individual.
Even if the DO is able to complete the research on all
employees protected to date (590), it is unlikely that it
will be able to develop the type of evidence required by the
Board to protect most individuals. Under a name-by-name
approach, we can expect a majority of the names to be
released.

CL By: (611637 a)

CL Reason: 1.5 (c)
DECL On: X1
DRV From: PER 9-87;COV 1.1-86

Secret -

13-00000..
‘ SN

ra

Secret

Issue

_ (AIOU) There is considerable concern among HRG
reviewers that the continued release of hundreds of Agency
employees' true names has the potential to do unacceptable
harm to US national security. The harm from release of a
large number of names lies in the fact that the potential
damage cannot be measured. This is due to the ripple effect
that would occur among assets in many places, with many

liaison services and multiple cover entities.

(U) To date, 590 CIA employee names, mostly DO, have
been protected and are subject to review by. the Board in May
1997. Most of these individuals have little or no
connection to the JFK assassination story. This number is
much larger than we anticipated when we agreed in March 1996
to the case-by- case approach.

(S) The decisions made by the Board at the May meeting
will set a precedent for the potentially hundreds of
additional names not yet identified. We have reviewed only
the Oswald 201 file and 12 boxes of the JFK sequestered
collection. At this point it is impossible to determine the
total number of employees mentioned in the JFK collection.
For example in Box 48, there is a 155 page Position Control
Register listing all employees in Far East Division
including (the Tokyo: station).

Recommendation

(AIOU) That the Agency re-visit the name issue with the
ARRB based on the following considerations:

* It should be recognized. that there are two separate
aspects of the public interest involved in this matter,.
and that it is necessary to achieve a reasonable
balance between them. On the one hand, it is clear
that it is now in the public interest to release as
much of our JFK collection. as is possible. On the
other hand, it is equally clear that it is in the
public interest for this Agency to maintain its
essential security and cover practices in order to be
able to serve the nation effectively in accordance with
its enabling legislation.

* It is not in the public's interest for one of the
fundamental principles of an intelligence agency--
protecting the identity of covert employees--to
continue to be eroded. While it is not always
possible to show harm by the release of any one
individual's name, the magnitude of the JFK release

Secret

13-00000-

wo - ‘ Secret

clearly has the potential to do harm to the Agency as
an institution and to national security. There is
simply no way to measure the possible effect of such a
release on past and future employees, agents, liaison
relationships and operations.

* Since most of the individuals involved have little or
no connection with the JFK assassination, the release
of their true names does not add to the assassination
story. The substitution of pseudonyms or other
identifier would meet the historian's need to track who
is saying what to whom, etc.

* However, the Agency does recognizes that there are some
employees who are part of the JFK story (many of their
names have already been released). We propose that the
ARRB staff and HRG work together to establish a list
of individuals who fit this category. These are the
names that would be released unless the Agency is able
to provide the required evidence of current harm.

This approach would serve both the public's and the Agency's
interests. It would also allow the Agency to focus its
resources on completing the review and responding to the
special requests of the Board, instead of spending an.
inordinate amount of time and money on individuals of!
marginal or no interest to the JFK story.

poe ——

— —~ ” Ree,
; (C) [Note: | There is also the issue of State. Department

aes -and: # “impact: of officially acknowledging as. CIA

Proposed Action

(AIOU) We have a little over two months to resolve this
issue and be ready for the ARRB meeting, May 12-13. Support
from top managerient including a willingness to raise the
issue. with the acting/new DCI and possibly the White House
is critical to success. I envision a memorandum to the
Board similar to the one prepared on sources. However, I
recommend it be signed by the General Counsel. We should
also be prepared to discuss the issue directly with the
Board since we are asking them to reconsider a decision in
which we initially concurred.

’-(AIOU) Mr. Marwell recommends that we include examples
of documents with names of marginal interest in our package.
He also would like to start immediately preparing a list of
those names which are “important to the assassination
story”. If you concur, HRG and DO JFK reviewers could begin
immediately on these two tasks.

=

Secret


13-00000
. a oo +

¥ ~ -
eas .

\
Secret

(AIOU) The Board has meetings. scheduled for 13-14
March, 2-3 April and 23-24 April. I recommend that we begin
discussions with ARRB staff as soon as possible with the
goal of having the memo ready no later than the.2-3 April
meeting. It is important that the DO continue to develop
evidence on the individuals who are scheduled for review in
May. The worst possible scenario is not succeeding with the
new proposal, and then not being ready to defend those
individuals who truly need to be protected.

Secret

